Leaderboard

What do you think about his analysis?

Sooooo ... Bob Gimlin was in on creating a fake P-G film with Roger Patterson? And never said anything to blow up the fraud that Roger had allegedly committed? I've just posted a long-lost and/or little-known 1978 newspaper article with comments from Bob Gimlin. Do these comments sound like a man who owes Roger Patterson, Patricia Patterson, or Al DeAtley any silence about the P-G film if it was, as now claimed, a fraud?

Fascinating. In particular, the 40 consistent behavioral similarities that Grok found in reported Bigfoot sightings is mind-bending. I really, really don't think that so many different people (eye-witnesses) would even be capable of making all that up. "Neither group (skeptics or believers) is comfortable with findings that suggest the phenomenon is real, but incomprehensible within current paradigms." That has been my take on the subject now for several years. Thanks for posting that video, Norseman. It is excellent.

It's interesting that TT concludes the subject in the footage is a human in a suit, and that he hates to debunk old footage. Because he showed the opposite about the subject in the footage in a previous video years ago. Remember his 'Cracking the Bigfoot Code' video from years ago. Just in case someone doesn't, it was mainly about Bob H.'s body proportions compared to Patty. Towards the end, he showed pics of alleged Bigfoot and used pixels to show the figure's arm length and leg length. In this newer analysis, he says the legs of the subject were 30% longer than the arms. Here is a screenshot of what he showed for the figure in the Memorial Day footage in his 'Cracking The Bigfoot Code' video from 11 years ago. He shows the leg length as only 7% longer than the legs, and 'Non-Human Range'. It's hard to say if the blurriness threw off his measurement of the arm length. I wonder if he remembered this while he was doing this newer analysis.

One day my brother and I hiked up to a mountain top above the Rogue River of southern Oregon and about ten acres of it was covered with dry grass that we called the prairie. The land was covered with mounds of dirt and holes built by digger squirrels or even badgers. The grass land was steep and had occasional rocks laying around. I still remember how steep the ground was and can't imagine running down the bumpy land with a furry bigfoot suit and hood without falling and spraining an ankle. I can visualize a bigfoot sprinting across this ground without falling since this is the kind of terrain they can run along chasing deer and elk for survival. A human that spends most of its time on flat concrete sidewalks would risk great injury running over bumpy ground with occasional holes covered with blades of grass that prairies have made by critters. My opinion is this creature is a real bigfoot showing its skill with sprinting across rugged prairie ground in an attempt to out maneuver humans. It's just a one of a kind film the depicts the agility of a speeding Sasquatch.

Cool closeup of "Yogi" A couple of days ago, a homeowner in Mission (Where MagniAesir lives) was swatted by a black bear that he tried to chase away from his sealed garbage shed. The bear charged him, chasing him up his back porch and mauling his arm as he tried to open his door. The injuries are minor, just large scratches, but the Conservation Dept. live trapped the large female yesterday, and identified it as having been involved in other recent problems, and killed it. Two other smaller bears were also trapped, and released out in the mountains, farther from homes.

I remember hearing the same thing. In a video about the footage, the narrator mentioned the runner slipped (I think) and fell on one of his attempts. I'm not certain if he said "slipped", or if it was something else, but he did fall. And he was wearing running shoes that had a rubber sole with a tread.

I got out today for a spring bear hunt, got skunked, but had a very nice day in the mountains NE of Boston Bar, in the Fraser Canyon area. The only game I spotted was a few grouse, which aren't open in the spring, of course. There was some fresh bear scat on my chosen trail, but no bruins in sight. My planned loop route turned into an in 'n' out when I found a large rock slide across several hundred metres of the road about 16 km in. Still a good day in some great country, and beautiful spring weather, so I came home refreshed.

Credit where credit is due to Sircalum (for posting the link) and to Matt Moneymaker (for offering an alternative explanation for this film). Everyone here seems to be accepting, at face value, that this new film was shot before the P-G film and was a rehearsal for it. For those who can't (or haven't) read MM's Facebook post, he posits that the new film was shot after the P-G film and was an attempt to recreate the encounter. Why? One reason suggested by MM is that Al DeAtley wanted to have a longer film to show and - let's face it - the P-G film as originally shot is not all that good. So perhaps Al DeAtley and Roger Patterson (and Bob Gimlin, if that's him in this film) wanted to have more film to show on the movie circuit and experimented with a quickly bought (or made) costume to see if they could get something useful. If so, this would have been done within weeks of the P-G film while Roger still had the rented (and misappropriated) camera. Alternatively, Al DeAtley could have been trying to prove to himself that the P-G film wasn't a hoax by trying to recreate it. Only pointing this out because at this time, we don't know when the film was shot. We know when the film was manufactured, but we know nothing else about when it was used, or when it was processed. So if the film Capturing Bigfoot is labeling this as a "trial run" they have not, at this point, laid an adequate foundation for doing so.

Catching up after two months of overwhelming activity caused by a move to West Virginia .... I had not given adequate attention to this little snippet before. The quote from a Reddit user (on p.1 of this thread) that "This [Roger's Ahtanum Valley film] would later be re-filmed and released as Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot in 1976" implies that someone involved in the P-G film - whether it be Patricia Patterson (since Roger had passed away), Al DeAtley, or Bob Gimlin - with knowledge of the Ahtanum Valley film had helped create the movie to support the reality of the P-G film. In other words, Bob Gimlin and others were involved in an ongoing "conspiracy" to hide the fact that the P-G film was fake. Ronald D. Olson, aka Ron Olson, was an early Bigfoot researcher in Oregon who had planned in 1973 to capture Bigfoot in a steel cage and then in 1976 was using a computer to predict where Bigfoot could be found. See https://bigfootforums.com/topic/124725-oregon-1973-a-steel-cage-for-bigfoot/, https://bigfootforums.com/topic/127168-oregon-1976-a-computer-and-tranquilizer-guns-for-bigfoot/, and https://bigfootforums.com/topic/130473-oregon-1976-ron-olsen-defends-idea-of-bigfoot/#comment-1216088. Ron Olson was also the producer and one of the writers for Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot. No one in the cast of the Ahtanum Valley film is mentioned in the list of actors or crew for Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot on IMDb, which was filmed in Oregon, not Washington. Ron Olson likely would have had enough knowledge about Bigfoot and Sasquatch sightings and the Pacific northwest to come up with a script for a Bigfoot film without updating Roger Patterson's Ahtanum Valley film. Is it possible to prove, that Ron Olson didn't merely update Roger's film? No. But the bare assertion that Roger's film was "re-filmed and released" under a different name is wholly unsupported as well and seems to be a leap by those who want to discredit the P-G film. EDIT: I just added two newspaper articles about the film in the Historical Archive section; they can be read at

I'm confident it is and that those skeptics have another hole in their feet.

what is going on with you? you posted the same thing 2 weeks ago. this isn't the ah ha you think it is.